Pediatric neurology residency selection is increasingly holistic globally, yet the specific attributes prioritized by program directors (PDs) in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab of Emirates (UAE), where Saudi Commission for Health Specialties (SCFHS)-accredited programs are established, remain unexamined. This study investigates the perceptions of PDs, compared to non-PD pediatric neurologists, regarding the ideal candidate. A multicenter, cross-sectional survey was distributed to pediatric neurology physicians across Saudi Arabia and the UAE, including 9 PDs and 34 non-PD faculty. The mixed-methods survey assessed the importance of academic credentials, non-cognitive attributes, and other qualifications using Likert scales, ranking exercises, and free-text responses. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, multivariable logistic regression, and thematic analysis of free-text responses. Quantitative analysis of attribute rankings identified professionalism/attitude (69.8%) and clinical rotation performance (58.1%) as the most frequently cited critical factors. Thematic analysis of open-ended responses further elucidated these priorities and provided rich contextual detail on the ideal candidate profile. Quantitative ratings confirmed that both groups prioritized these non-cognitive and clinical attributes over academic metrics. However, significant differences emerged: PDs rated communication skills substantially higher than non-PDs (mean 5.0 vs. 4.5, p=0.03) and also assigned greater importance to interview performance (mean 4.7 vs. 3.9, p=0.04). Multivariable analysis confirmed that valuing communication skills (aOR=5.81; 95% CI: 1.18–28.6; p=0.03) and interview performance (aOR=2.45; 95% CI: 1.02–5.88; p=0.045) were independent predictors of being a PD. While the pediatric neurology community broadly endorses a holistic selection model, PDs in Saudi Arabia and the UAE distinctly prioritize superior communication skills and interview performance. These findings suggest that refining selection processes to effectively evaluate these competencies is essential for aligning recruitment with the priorities of those overseeing training.
Bamaga et al. (Thu,) studied this question.